IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v25y2001i4p440-453.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Evaluation of Analysis Options for the One-Group-Per-Condition Design

Author

Listed:
  • Sherri P. Varnell

    (University of Memphis)

  • David M. Murray

    (University of Memphis)

  • William L. Baker

    (University of Memphis)

Abstract

This article addresses the analytic problems associated with a design in which one identifiable group is allocated to each treatment condition and members of those groups are measured to assess the intervention. Such designs are often called quasi-experiments if the groups are not randomized to conditions and group-randomized trials if the groups are randomized. They present special problems, and previous reports have argued against their use in efficacy or effectiveness trials. Even so, this design still appears with surprising frequency. This article presents the results from a new simulation study that underscores the analytic problems associated with this design.

Suggested Citation

  • Sherri P. Varnell & David M. Murray & William L. Baker, 2001. "An Evaluation of Analysis Options for the One-Group-Per-Condition Design," Evaluation Review, , vol. 25(4), pages 440-453, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:25:y:2001:i:4:p:440-453
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X0102500402
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X0102500402
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X0102500402?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simpson, J.M. & Klar, N. & Donner, A., 1995. "Accounting for cluster randomization: A review of primary prevention trials, 1990 through 1993," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 85(10), pages 1378-1383.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jonathan L. Blitstein & Peter J. Hannan & David M. Murray & William R. Shadish, 2005. "Increasing the Degrees of Freedom in Existing Group Randomized Trials," Evaluation Review, , vol. 29(3), pages 241-267, June.
    2. Henry A. Feldman & Sonja M. McKinlay & Minoo Niknian, 1996. "Batch Sampling To Improve Power in a Community Trial," Evaluation Review, , vol. 20(3), pages 244-274, June.
    3. S. Mukhopadhyay & S. W. Looney, 2009. "Quantile dispersion graphs to compare the efficiencies of cluster randomized designs," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(11), pages 1293-1305.
    4. Paul J. Gruenewald, 1997. "Analysis Approaches To Community Evaluation," Evaluation Review, , vol. 21(2), pages 209-230, April.
    5. Ahn, Chul & Hu, Fan & Skinner, Celette Sugg, 2009. "Effect of imbalance and intracluster correlation coefficient in cluster randomized trials with binary outcomes," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 596-602, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:25:y:2001:i:4:p:440-453. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.